Apple’s new iPad uses SHA to boost resolution. What the heck does that mean?

Share This article

The iPad 3’s QXGA resolution and quad-graphics-core A5X SoC have had the tech industry buzzing for the past week. One of the most common questions everyone is asking has been how Apple managed to pack a 2048×1536 display into a 9.7-inch form factor without killing battery life or jacking up the price. Research indicates that Apple is using displays built with a technology known as Super High Aperture (SHA). So what’s that mean in English?

Ultra-high resolution displays like the iPad 3’s are challenging to manufacture for two reasons. First — and this is the problem SHA addresses — is the issue of parasitic capacitive coupling. When conventionally manufactured pixels are packed as tightly as the iPad 3’s, electrons tend to jump from transistor to transistor, which does wonders for display quality. SHA solves this by depositing a thin resin layer between the indium tin oxide pixel electrodes and their signal lines.

The other challenge — the one SHA doesn’t directly address — is the need for more backlighting. Conventional LCDs rely on a backlight to display an image, which in turn requires that a portion of each pixel be transparent. Higher display resolutions mean smaller pixels, and smaller pixels means a smaller aperture for light to pass through. Display manufacturers typically compensate for this by boosting the strength of the backlight. That’s fine for any device that plugs into a wall, but it’s more problematic for any handheld device.

Original image by DisplaySearch

The iPad 3 reportedly uses at least twice as many LEDs as the iPad 2 and its screen is believed to draw more power as a result. This likely explains why the device is heavier than its predecessor; the iPad 3 probably has a larger battery. As for its display quality, some have claimed that the iPad’s 2048×1536 resolution isn’t really a Retina display because its PPI is “just” 264 as opposed to the iPad’s 330. This isn’t accurate. The term Retina display broadly means “the point at which a person with 20/20 vision can no longer distinguish individual pixels.” That figure changes considerably depending on your distance from the display. At 12 inches, 287 PPI is good enough to be classed a retina display. At 15 inches, the figure is 229 PPI. People tend to hold tablets farther away from themselves than they do a mobile phone, which explains why Apple can justifiably claim to offer a Retina display with a lower pixel density.

These reports raise the question of how Apple managed to pull off the iPhone 4’s 640×960 screen, with its 334 DPI two years ago without utilizing a technology like SHA. Information there is limited, but a teardown done by Tech-On shows that the iPhone 4’s aperture ratio was significantly less than the iPad 3’s. According to that article, Apple’s decision to bond the screen, touch panel, and case front was made to eliminate light reflections that could degrade image quality. The iPhone’s lower resolution and relatively small display mean that per wafer yields are likely higher, even using conventional amorphous silicon.

In the past, Apple has purchased displays from Sharp, Samsung, and LG Display, but iSuppli has stated that of the three, only Samsung is currently able to manufacture the panels in sufficient quantity to meet Apple’s needs. According to analyst Vinita Jakhanwal, yields still aren’t that great. “The display specifications on the new iPad are very demanding in terms of the very high resolution,” Jakhanwal said in an email. “Achieving this high resolution without compromising on the power consumption and brightness and maintaining Apple’s quality standards are supposedly proving to be a challenge for LG Display and Sharp.”

Image by Gizmodo

Apple’s continued reliance on Samsung is more than a little ironic given the lawsuits between the two manufacturers. Apple has clearly been the aggressor — Samsung refrained from filing counter suits for months — but the international patent lawsuits are enough to make the Hattfield-McCoy rivalry look like an aggressive episode of Family Feud. The new iPad’s shipping date has steadily slipped backwards since the devices went on sale; an iPad 3 ordered today is shown as shipping in 2-3 weeks. With LG and Sharp reportedly mired in manufacturing difficulties, Apple’s reliance on Samsung will be even greater. At some point the two companies will presumably kiss and make up, with Samsung offering preferential manufacturing terms in exchange for Apple dropping all its lawsuits. For now, the two companies remain simultaneously at odds and joined at the hip.

Tagged In

Post a Comment

They’re going to create so much animosity that nobody will work with them. Since they want to sue everyone. It’s just bad business.

Joel Hruska

Highly unlikely. They’re currently suing the crap out of Samsung, and Samsung is one of their most important suppliers. OEMs don’t make a living out of being brave, principled, or offended. They make a living from selling lots of products.

Anonymous

“Apple has clearly been the aggressor — Samsung refrained from filing counter suits for months”

Apple first sued Samsung on April 15, 2011 in the Northern District of California, Samsung then counter-sued in Seoul, Tokyo and Mannheim, Germany on April 22, 2011. By June 2011, Samsung had added counter-suits in the UK, Delaware and DC.

Maybe 5 business days counts as months where you work, but even if you mean to limit it to US suits less than 2 months kinda stretches the credulity of “Apple has been clearly the aggressor — Samsung refrained from filing counter suits for months”.

Both have been aggressive.

Joel Hruska

Poison,

Samsung avoided filing a full set of international suits against Apple, opting instead to try and work with the company to revamp the Galaxy Tab series for launch in places like Australia. It was only after these efforts failed that the company began internationally suing Apple in the full range of courts Apple was suing it.

Anonymous

Jeez, admit you are wrong because you’re only digging yourself deeper by dragging Australia into this.

Apple sued in California on April 15. They followed with a suit in Australia on April 18.

Samsung began countersuing in Seoul, Tokyo and Mannheim on April 22 2011.

Apple didn’t receive an injunction in Australia until August, the judge required Samsung to give Apple access to the Australian version of the Galaxy Tab seven days before its planned launch.

Talks began and Samsung delayed its launch of the Galaxy Tab in Australia on August 29 until September 30.

Samsung countersued in Australia on Sept 18.

Samsung never offered Apple a settlement (which likely included patent licensing and royalties) until September 30. Apple rejected the settlement on October 4 2011.

So how does that square with your timeline? Just admit you’re wrong and remove the stupid sentence.

http://kensey.livejournal.com/ Joe T.

“Retina display” has no technical meaning at all, it’s a trademark of Apple.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_CSU5OBUJESQBU6MUCCFOLOAUA4 CharlesM

It’s actually a scientific term but Jobs lied to make the iPhone 4 fit. You need a 477 dpi for the iPhone 4 for it to be true Retina Display. The iPhone 4 does NOT and has NEVER had Retina Display and the new iPad probably does not either. People like the author of this article are Apple apologists who never shone a light on Apple’s many lies.

Same article: “Soneira added that we might not realistically need anything better than 326 ppi.”

Have you ever used an iPhone 4/4S? Try this. Hold it 12″ from your face. Stare at it. Can you see pixels?

I can’t. Seriously can’t. And I’ve tried in different backgrounds, colors, and images. On my old iPhone 3G, I absolutely can see pixels.

When the person you’re linking for a rebuttal admits that the realistic limit is right on the nose of what the phone offers, I think you’re a bit off-base saying we’re all apologists.

Anonymous

I agree that it’s not an ISO standard, but that’s not the same as not having any technical meaning at all. Blu-Ray is another registered trademark that certainly has a technical meaning. Retina display may be an advertising term coined by Apple, but it certainly does have a technical meaning. Apple’s web site describes the iPad’s Retina display by saying the “pixels are so close together, your eyes can’t discern individual ones at a normal viewing distance.” That’s the meaning as Apple uses it, and that’s pretty much exactly how all these technical articles are using the term. I think the length of your arms pretty much limits “normal viewing distance” to a reasonable range. There’s no question in my mind that the retina display will become a new “standard” benchmark for consumer displays, and within the next 24 months all the other manufacturers will eventually offer displays with “retina”-like density. That said, I expect that someday the term will become generic, like “aspirin” and “band-aid”.

Anonymous

@ Antonio. This is the “real” world. Where because of economies of scale there is no alternative to Apple. Esp. when it comes to profitability they’re not only going to work, but work closer together.

http://pulse.yahoo.com/_CSU5OBUJESQBU6MUCCFOLOAUA4 CharlesM

You need a 477 dpi for the iPhone 4 for it to be true Retina Display. The iPhone 4 does NOT and has NEVER had Retina Display and the new iPad probably does not either. People like the author of this article are Apple apologists who never shone a light on Apple’s many lies.http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/06/iphone-4-retina/

Nathan Madigan

So did you read the article Wired links to in the update at the top of their article. It explains that the 477 ppi number comes from having “perfect” vision, not 20/20. Apple clearly uses 20/20 vision as their standard, and has every right to do so since that is what most of the world considers to be standard vision.

Freddie Beasley

Did you read the article, because no where in there does it say “perfect” vision not 20/20 vision, that phrase in not in the article at all perhaps you should read first, before looking like a idiot.

http://profiles.google.com/enigmav8 Chris Kleczynski

“One of the most common questions everyone is asking has been how Apple managed to pack a 2048×1536 display into a 9.7-inch form factor…”

ummmm, I’m sorry since when did Apple start manufacturing the LCD for the iPad 3??? Once again they take all the credit for simply finding newer tech. Meanwhile, Android tabs will be coming out at the same time with the same res @ 10.1″+. Move along, nothing to see here.

Anonymous

Samsung proving once against why they are the #1 Electronics Corporation year after year after year with twice the Revenue and Total Net Assets of Apple. Who is after all totally dependent on them for the Best Quality Chips and Screens that make their iProducts work in the first place!!!!

btw…. you’d think that Apple would take some of that Cash and buy them some shares in Samsung. lol… That is if they could, since near all publically held shares are still held by Samsung Group Chaebol and only a small amount of shares are actually traded publically. They are afterall only a part of the SAMSUNG Global Conglomerate Empire and Electronics Equivalent of the Saudi Royals! lol….

And here’s the Topper that should thoroughly embarrass all the iCrAppleholic Apple Top Brass: Samsung was again the #1 Corporate Investor in American Economy, Jobs and total Investments. Far outranking the Top 15 last year….. again. Companies like GM, Toyota, GE, Chrysler, Ford, and somewhere down around #120…… Apple!!! …..so really, how American is Apple when the only parts in their products that are made in America come from SAMSUNG! lol…. I think CrApple’s been thoroughly SAMSTUNG’D!!!! :DDD

http://twitter.com/SoftwareWorlds SoftwareWorld

lawsuits are bad for business.

Anonymous

There’s no question in my mind that the retina display will become a new
“standard” benchmark for consumer displays, and within the next 24
months all the other manufacturers will eventually offer displays with
“retina”-like density. That said, I expect that someday the term will
become generic, like “aspirin” and “band-aid”.

Use of this site is governed by our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Copyright 1996-2015 Ziff Davis, LLC.PCMag Digital Group All Rights Reserved. ExtremeTech is a registered trademark of Ziff Davis, LLC. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of Ziff Davis, LLC. is prohibited.